It's about Hillary, not her husband: Column
Even if it was Bill Clinton’s speech of a lifetime, there’s no excuse for putting him on the front page of a history-making night.
Hillary Clinton became the first ever woman nominated to lead a major-party ticket for president of the United States on Tuesday night.
But you wouldn’t know it was a groundbreaking feat looking at some of the front pages of America’s newspapers.
Instead of pictures of the former first lady, who may become the next president, there was her husband, Bill. Granted, he delivered a loving, humanizing speech to the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia about his wife’s lifelong service to this country.
But c’mon, his wife made history! Even if it was Bill Clinton’s speech of a lifetime, there’s no excuse for putting him front and center on the front page of a history-making night.
None.
Maybe the most egregious example comes from The Buffalo News, with a large picture of Bill under the headline: “Clinton makes history as nominee for president.”
One would not be crazy to read that headline and think the 42nd president was running for a third term — until you get into the small print of a story actually written by two Washington Post reporters.
Examples abound. Look at the Arizona Daily Sun, Houston Chronicle, Chicago Tribune.
Granted, it’s a problem when the dynastic political couple have the same last name.
But The Bakersfield Californian figured out how to handle it with “Hillary gets nomination.”
The Salt Lake Tribune’s prominent close-up photo was Bill below the headline: “Clinton makes history, wins Democratic nomination.“ But they got the picture order wrong. A big one of Bill. A blurry one of Hillary taken from the teleprompter.
Booker and Michelle Obama are proof America is on the rise: Column
It’s easy to reflexively say this is sexism. Some of that could be in play. I imagine newspaper editors would say they wanted live action from the stage, so Bill was the go-to photo. But so what?
There are ways around that. Not all newspapers focused on the husband many worry will undermine or steal his wife’s thunder if she’s elected.
TheIndianapolis Star got it right with an attractive photo of Hillary under a bold, two-word headline: "History made." So did The Denver Post: “Clinton makes history.” And so did The (Danbury, Conn.) News-Times, which used an old photo of when Clinton visited the area under a headline: “Making history.”
The Chicago Sun-Times turned it into a local girl — Clinton was raised in Illinois — makes good story with: “From Park Ridge to … the nominee.”
Sometimes democracy needs a good hug: Column
POLICING THE USA: A look at race, justice, media
The Los Angles Times decided it wasn’t that big of a story. Its lead column mysteriously went with: “For Clinton, star power burns bright.” And no photos. The West coast newspapers — behind three hours — had plenty of time to cover history.
Lovely and moving as Bill Clinton’s speech was, his wife’s picture or cheering delegates are the only photos that belonged prominently on the nation’s front pages. History of this proportion is rarely made.
Shame on any newspaper that missed this moment.
Alicia Shepard, a veteran media writer, worked with Afghan journalists and the U.S. Agency for International Development during two years in Kabul. Follow her on Twitter @Ombudsman.
In addition to its own editorials, USA TODAY publishes diverse opinions from outside writers, including our Board of Contributors. To read more columns, go to the Opinion front page, follow us on Twitter @USATOpinion and sign up for our daily Opinion newsletter.